If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Yahoo)   So, what would happen if you were convicted of a crime and told to await instructions on when and where to report to prison, and then those instructions never came?   (news.yahoo.com) divider line 59
    More: Strange, robberies, Missouri Attorney General, Missouri Department of Corrections, time served, prison sentence  
•       •       •

6466 clicks; posted to Main » on 17 Apr 2014 at 1:04 PM (19 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



59 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-04-17 04:37:02 PM

Firethorn: You know, I wonder how many would turn their lives around even without decades of prison?


it must be fun to wonder things.
 
2014-04-17 05:03:59 PM

Russ1642: I'm conflicted. He deserved jail, but now it seems like it wouldn't benefit anyone.


I think he should serve a short period in jail.  A week, maybe, a month at most.  And then he should be given probation or parole or whatever they want to call it and turned loose, essentially with the provision being "Stay clean and we're all good, but if you get caught breaking the law, we're going to throw the book at you and you'll have to serve the entire time".

If his lawyer is telling the truth about him being a model citizen at this point, then he should be fine with that.  If he's a thug that just hasn't been caught recently, then it'll make him nervous knowing that even a relatively minor crime could get him some fairly serious time.

I'm a bit dubious of the "he's a model citizen" stuff.  Obviously him and his lawyer have a reason to make that statement.  The one thing I know about him for sure is that he was convicted of armed robbery.
 
2014-04-17 05:05:42 PM
In the mornin you go gunnin'
For the man who stole your water
And you fire till he is done in
But they catch you at the border
And the mourners are all singin'
As they drag you by your feet
But the hangman isn't hangin'
And they put you on the street
 
2014-04-17 05:28:30 PM

thamike: it must be fun to wonder things.


It's lots of fun!

More realistically, my next step after making an observation is to make a theory, then design a test of said theory.

In this case it might be along the lines of 'Maybe we don't need to put people in prison for more than ~7 years(short of murder), because by then they'll likely have calmed down'.  Especially if you use the money saved from cutting 15 year sentences in half to enable programs to make sure the released prisoners have gained ~7 years of education during that time.  Something along the lines of GED, Associates degree, and 4 years of job experience.
 
2014-04-17 05:58:12 PM

Firethorn: thamike: it must be fun to wonder things.


It's lots of fun!

More realistically, my next step after making an observation is to make a theory, then design a test of said theory.


You've already fell down some rhetorical stairs.
 
2014-04-17 06:08:13 PM

Private_Citizen: Governor Nixon needs to commute Anderson's sentence. He's rehabilitated, and fully integrated into society. Besides, it costs money to imprison someone, and this fellow pays taxes.

Keep the tax revenue, save the expense, and let the man go home to his kids.


But but but he's black!  If we don't incarcerate him right now and deprive his children of a solid father figure how can he possibly be prevented from smoking that dangerous devil's weed and impregnating our women?  Good god man have you no outrage!

/that's sarcasm for those not bright enough to see it
 
2014-04-17 06:12:22 PM

anuran: indylaw: This seems like an excellent candidate for the governor to issue a pardon or reprieve.

But he's Black and in Missouri. What are the chances?


Nixon is a Democrat. Jeff City Republicans say he's the "most brutal tyrant of any kind whatsoever in galactic history, worse than Vadar and Hitler combined, though still not as bad as Fartbongo."

I'd say odds are pretty good Nixon will pardon or commute him before leaving office. That will leave the dude in prison for longer than he should be there. But at least he won't rot for 13 years.
 
2014-04-17 06:18:40 PM

Russ1642: I'm conflicted. He deserved jail, but now it seems like it wouldn't benefit anyone.


Really the lesson that should be learned (that no one that matters will) is that these stupid long prison terms are completely worthless in most cases.  6months or a year away getting clean and learning a trade probably would have had this guy on the straight and narrow.

Tax burden turns into tax payer at 1/100th of the cost.
 
2014-04-18 12:46:48 PM

timujin: pute kisses like a man: timujin: If this has gone on longer than the statute of limitations on the original crime, they just need to let the guy go.

statute of limitations is from the date of the crime to prosecution.  he has already been prosecuted, tried, and convicted, so statute of limitations is not applicable.  then there's right to a speedy trial... but he had a speedy trial...  maybe there's a constitutional punishment issue, to wait fearful for 13 years... but, that's a little goofy too.

sounds like he's screwed because justice is not about fairness.  it's a system that works as hard as it can to be applied according to its system.  inherently, it will make mistakes, and then refuse equity to enter the question.  because, after all, this is a society of of laws, not men.

/ i would support the governor that would commute a sentence like this.  the governor enjoys an equitable check and balance to the harshness of the law. so, as a government, we have prepared for fark ups in the system.  unfortunately, no governor has ever commuted any sentence, unless for his campaign supporters.

I realize that, legally, the statute of limitations doesn't apply in this case.  However, it could be used as a guideline when dealing with what is a very particular and unusual set of circumstances.


i agree that it would be nice to use the statute of limitations as a guideline.  but, a court would not go for it.  the statutes on limitations are very clear on the time period.  where the law is clear, a court will not interpret the law outside the unambiguous language.

the point i was trying to say is that this is one of those cases that slips between the cracks.  it wasn't properly planned for by the drafters of our laws (because they probably thought no one was stupid enough to let it happen).

that's why I think you would have to make a constitutional argument about cruel punishment or a due process type argument.  but even then, state courts generally like people to go to jail, the judges are elected.
 
Displayed 9 of 59 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report